Thursday 19 March 2015 11.24pm
James Hatts wrote:
What you posted was deliberately phrased to be provocative in the extreme.
I do not see what is gained by throwing around crude remarks which many people will take as a fundamental attack on their faith. It's just bad manners, really.
Would you say the same things in face-to-face conversation with Christians or Muslims?
I think you undermine your own argument by being offensive for the sake of it.
I have had these types of conversations with Christians and Muslims. Thankfully, they're not all fruit loops. I simply do not see my remarks as being "crude" or bad manners. I am not criticising those who worship these two historical non-entities. I do reserve the right to question/parody/criticise these long-dead "visionaries". Who's to say that in 2,000 years time there will not be a church of Psychic Sally? Her comments and her "insights" are no less valid than these two. You of course reserve the right to remove my posts, but let's be honest here James, you did it out of fear of offending Muslims who have shown in the past that they are more than willing to harm people who criticise Islam and "the prophet".
Was the "Life of Brian" a fundamental attack on people's faith? Is Andre Serrano's "[email protected]
@s Christ" offensive for the sake of it? Was Salman Rusdie's Satanic Verses provocative in the extreme? And let's not forget the brave folks at Charlie Hebdo. I would suggest that they were shining examples of free expression and should be protected at all costs. If a religion of 1 billion plus adherents does not have the inner strength to ignore criticism a